Eur. Phys. J.
C (2018) 78:1022
https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6488-3
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
Scale-dependent rotating BTZ black hole
Ángel Rincóna , Benjamin Kochb
Instituto de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna, 4860 Santiago, Chile
Received: 21 June 2018 / Accepted: 30 November 2018
© The Author(s) 2018
Abstract This work presents a generalization of the rotat-
ing black hole in two plus one dimensions, in the light of
scale-dependent gravitational couplings. In particular, the
gravitational coupling κ0 and the cosmological term Λ0 are
not forced to be constants anymore. Instead, κ and Λ are
allowed to change along the radial scale r . The effective Ein-
stein field equations of this problem are solved by assum-
ing static rotational symmetry and by maintaining the usual
structure of the line element. For this generalized solution,
the asymptotic behavior, the horizon structure, and the ther-
modynamic properties are analyzed.
1 Introduction
To formulate a consistent and predictive quantum theory of
gravity (QG) is one of the mayor challenges for the commu-
nity seeking a unified description of the known fundamen-
tal interactions. Currently, at least 16 major approaches to
quantum gravity have been proposed in the literature (see [1]
and references therein), but none of these approaches have
reached the goal in a completely satisfactory way.
In this paper we contribute to the topic of quantum gravity
by studying black hole solutions of effective scale–dependent
gravity in 2+1 dimensions. We thus, combine three different
aspects, namely, scale dependence, gravity in 2 + 1 dimen-
sions and black holes. Each of those aspects hast a motivation
of its own, but all of those aspects have an important moti-
vation from the perspective of quantum gravity:
• Black holes (BHs):
Black Holes are objects of paramount importance in grav-
itational theories [2]. They allow to study gravitational
systems at the transition between a quantum and a classi-
cal regime as for example through the the famously pre-
a e-mail: arrincon@uc.cl
b e-mail: bkoch@fis.puc.cl
0123456789().: V,-vol
dicted Hawking radiation [3,4]. BHs are thus excellent
laboratories to investigate and understand several aspects
of general relativity at the transition between a classical
and quantum regime [5].
• 2 + 1 dimensions: It can be expected that the features of
a successful solution of the problem of quantum gravity
are universal for gravitational theories of different dimen-
sionality. Since gravity in 2 + 1 dimensions is mathemat-
ically less involved than in 3 + 1 dimensions, this lower
dimensional theory is a good toy model if one aims to
understand the underlying mechanisms of full quantum
gravity in 3 + 1 dimensions. Apart from this motiva-
tion by quantum gravity, the study of gravity in 2 + 1
dimensions is of interest because of its deep connection
to Chern-Simons theory [6,7] and because of its appli-
cations in the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence
[8–12]. Within this lower dimensional gravitation theory
the black hole solution found by Bañados, Teitelboim,
and Zanelli (BTZ) [13,14] plays a crucial role.
• Scale dependence (SD): Before actually attacking the
whole problem of QG with all its different, and up to now
limited, realizations, one can begin with a more modest
approach and concentrate on generic common features,
which are expected from such a theory. One feature which
is shared by most of the candidate theories for quan-
tum gravity (actually by most quantum field theories)
is that they predict a scale dependence of the coupling
constants in the corresponding effective action. Luckily
there is a well defined formalism which allows to deduce
background solutions from a given effective action. We
will follow those techniques which have been previously
probed with a variety of problems [15–30]. In this paper
we aim to study the dominant effects such a scale depen-
dence could have on the BTZ black hole in the Einstein
Hilbert truncation of the effective action of gravity in
2+1 dimensions. By using a well defined method which is
based on the variational principle one can explore leading
local effects of quantum gravity on a rotationally sym-
123
1022 Page 2 of 10 Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022

nant of the metric field. The classical Einstein field equations

are obtained from (1) by varying the action with respect to
the metric field
G μν + Λ0 gμν = κ0 Tμν , (2)
where Tμν is the energy momentum tensor associated to a
matter source

δL M
Tμν ≡ Tμν
M
= −2 + L M gμν . (3)
δg μν

For the case of rotational symmetry without any matter con-

tribution, the metric solution of (2) takes the form
 2
Fig. 1 Conceptual flow chart for the interplay of SD, BHs, and 2 + 1
ds 2 = − f 0 (r )dt 2 + f 0 (r )−1 dr 2 + r 2 N0 (r )dt + dφ . (4)
dimensions with QG
Here, f 0 (r ) and N0 (r ) are the lapse function and the shift
metric space-time in a source free region (like BTZ), even function respectively, which are given by
without the knowledge of the exact underlying theory.
r2 16G 20 J02
f 0 (r ) = −8M0 G 0 + + , (5)
The important connection of those three ingredients with 0
2 r2
the underlying topic of QG is shown in Fig. 1, showing clearly 4G 0 J0
N0 (r ) = − , (6)
that the study of corrections to the classical BTZ solution, as r2
those derived in this paper, are a key test for any theory of
QG. where 0 is defined by Λ0 ≡ −1/20 . The two constants of
This paper is organized as follows: after this introduction, integration M0 and J0 are the conserved charges associated to
we present the action and the classical BTZ solution in the asymptotic invariance under time shifts (mass) and rotations
next section. Then, the general framework of this work is (angular momentum) respectively. The horizons
introduced in Sect. 3. The scale dependence for a rotating  
BTZ black hole is presented in Sect. 4. The bevaviour of (r0± )2 = 4G 0 M0 20 1 ± Δ , (7)
the Ricci scalar, the asymptotic space-time as well as the
thermodynamics is investigated in Sects. 5 and 6 respectively. are defined through the condition f (r0± ) = 0. Here, the
The discussion of this result and remarks are shown in Sect. 7. parameter Δ encodes the impact of the rotational contribu-
The main ideas and results are summarized in the conclusion tion on the event horizon
Sect. 8. Note that throughout the paper we will use natural
units with (c = h̄ = k B = 1).
 2

Δ= 1−  J0
. (8)
M0 0
2 Classical BTZ solution with J0 = 0
The positive root r0+ is the black hole’s outer horizon. One
This section reminds of some key features of the classi- can express the lapse function in terms of the event horizons
cal BTZ black hole solution [13,14], such as line element,  
event horizons, and thermodynamics. Besides, the contribu- 1  2 + 2

− 2
f 0 (r ) = r − (r 0 ) r 2
− (r 0 ) . (9)
tion of angular momentum will be considered focussing on 20 r 2
the extremal black hole case. The minimal coupling between
gravity and matter is described by the the Einstein Hilbert It is important to note that, the parameters must satisfy
action
   M0 > 0, ∧ |J0 | ≤ M0 0 , (10)
√ 1  
I0 [gμν ] = d3 x −g R − 2Λ0 +L M , (1)
2κ0 in order to get physical solutions. When the classical angular
where gμν is the metric field, R is the Ricci scalar, κ0 ≡ momentum takes a maximum value given by
8π G 0 is the gravitational coupling, Λ0 is the cosmological
constant, L M is the matter Lagrangian, and g is the determi- J0max = M0 0 , (11)

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022 Page 3 of 10 1022

the solution is called an extremal black hole. Regarding black The above equations of motion are consistently comple-
hole thermodynamics, the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is mented by the Bianchi identity, reflecting invariance under
given by coordinate transformations

A H (r0+ ) ∇ μ G μν = 0. (20)
S0 (r0+ ) = . (12)
4G 0

The corresponding Hawking temperature is

4 Scale dependence BTZ solution with J0 = 0
 
+ 1  16G 0 M0 
T0 (r0 ) = Δ, (13) The line element consistent with a static space-time, with
4π  r0+
rotational symmetry is given by
where A H (r0 ) is the horizon area which is given by  2
ds 2 = − f (r )dt 2 + g(r )dr 2 + r 2 N (r )dt + dφ , (21)
 √
A H (r0+ ) = dx h = 2πr0+ . (14)
where f (r ), g(r ) N (r ), and k(r ) are functions that must be
determined from the equations of motion (16–20). When the
functional scale dependence of the couplings G k and Λk is
3 Scale dependent couplings and scale setting known, the system closes into itself and the equations (16-
20) allow, at least numerically to determine the functions
This section resumes the implementation of scale depen- f (r ), g(r ) N (r ), and k(r ) [16]. In certain truncations and
dence that was used for the present work. The notation functional approaches such as the functional renormalization
and procedures follow [15–32]. In this framework the scale group approach it is indeed possible to study scale depen-
dependence is implemented at the level of an effective action dence and approximate improvement of classical black hole
as a generalization of the classical action. For the case of (1), solutions [33–48]. However, those approximation scenarios
the truncated effective action takes the form are subject to theoretical uncertainties related to the trunca-
  
√ 1   tions used to calculate the beta functions. Further, due to the
Γ [gμν , k] = d3 x −g R − 2Λk +L M . (15) implicit assumption of improvement of classical solutions,
2κk
they typically do not solve the whole selfconsistent system
As shown in [19], this action is consistent at the classical level
of equations (16–20) anymore.
if one sets the arbitrary scale based on a variational principle,
The idea is to avoid the theoretical uncertainties inflicted
which means that the scale k considered as a non-dynamical
with the usage of given functions G k and Λk , and instead
field instead of a global constant. A variation of (15) with
to learn about the radial dependence of the functions G(r )
respect to the metric field gμν gives the modified Einstein
and Λ(r ) directly from the selfconsistent system of equations
equations
(16–20). Thus, instead of trying to solve for the four functions
G μν + gμν Λk = κk Tμν
effec
. (16) { f (r ), g(r ), N (r ), k(r )} for given, but uncertain, G k and
Λk one can try to solve the equations (16–20) directly for the
Here, the effective stress energy tensor is defined as five functions { f (r ), g(r ), Λ(r ), G(r ), N (r )}. Here, G(r )
and Λ(r ) have inherited their radial dependence from k(r ).
κk Tμν
effec
= κk Tμν
M
− Δtμν , (17) The problem for this elegant workaround is that there are now
five unknown functions in a system which only has four inde-
which consists of the usual stress energy of the matter pendent equations. Thus, one additional condition is needed
M and an additional contribution due to the
Lagrangian Tμν in order to be able to fully solve this system of equations. Fol-
scale dependence of the gravitational coupling lowing previous findings [16,18,20,21,27,32] this additional
  condition is that we restrict to solutions which fulfill the so-
Δtμν = G k gμν  − ∇μ ∇ν G −1
k . (18) called Schwarzschild relation, namely that g(r ) ≡ f (r )−1 .
Therefore, the corresponding line element is
For the vacuum solution presented in this paper, the pure
M = 0.
matter contribution is absent Tμν  2
Varying the action (15) with respect to the scale-field k(x) ds 2 = − f (r )dt 2 + f (r )−1 dr 2 + r 2 N (r )dt + dφ (22)
gives
   
∂ 1 ∂ Λk and the equations of motion can be solved for the four func-
R −2 · ∂k = 0. (19) tions { f (r ), Λ(r ), G(r ), N (r )}.
∂k G k ∂k G k

123
1022 Page 4 of 10 Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022

4.1 Solution

Based on the ansatz (22) one finds that the equations (16) are
solved by

G0
G(r ) = , (23)
1 + r
4G 0 J0
N (r ) = − Y (r ), (24)
r2
r2 16G 20 J02
f (r ) = − 8M0 G 0 Y (r ) + + Y (r )2 , (25)
20 r2
r + 3r 2  − 8G 0 20 M0 Y (r ) 4G 20 J02 Fig. 2 Radial dependence of the lapse function f (r ) for 0 = 5, G 0 =
Λ(r ) = − − (Y (r ) )2 1, M0 = 1, and J0 = 1. The different curves correspond to the classical
0 r (1 + r )
2 r2 case  = 0 solid black line,  = 0.05 dashed orange line,  = 0.2
4G 0 (M0 r + 2M0 r 2  − 4G 0 J02 Y (r )) dotted blue line, and  = 1 dot-dashed red line
+ Y (r ) ,
r 2 (1 + r )
(26) Moreover, when {, M0 } → {0, −1/8G 0 } the appropriate
vacuum of the theory is Ad S3 which is invariant under per-
where
turbations due to the running of the couplings controlled

1 by . Further asymptotic corrections can be seen from (47).
Y (r ) ≡ 1 − 2r  + 2(r ) ln 1 +
2
. (27)
r Since corrections due to quantum scale dependence should
be small, it is useful to expand the solutions around  ≈ 0
This solution involves five constants of integration, which are
labeled {G 0 , J0 , M0 , Λ0 = −1/20 , and }. Their naming  
G(r ) = G 0 1 − r  + O( 2 ) , (36)
and physical meaning is given from their interpretation in  
two complementary limits. First, the constant J0 → 0 does N (r ) = N0 (r ) 1 − 2r  + O( 2 ) (37)
not appear in the scale dependent but non-rotating case [19].  
Thus, one imposes that for J0 → 0 the solution (23) reduces 4G 20 J02
f (r ) = f 0 (r ) + 16 G 0 M0 − r  + O( 2 ), (38)
to the solution reported in [19], namely r2
 
G0 Λ(r ) = Λ0 1 + 2r  + O( 2 ) . (39)
lim G(r ) = , (28)
J0 →0 1 + r
lim N (r ) = 0, (29) Making this expansion one assumes that the dimensionfull
J0 →0 quantity  is much smaller than any other dimensionfull
r2 quantity, such as r , G 0 , J0 , or Λ0 . In order to get an intuition
lim f (r ) = − 8M0 G 0 Y (r ) + , (30)
J0 →0 20 on the radial dependence of the lapse function f (r ) and the
r + 3r 2  + 8G 0 20 M0 Y (r ) corresponding asymptotic behavior one can also refer to a
lim Λ(r ) = − graphical analysis, which is done in Fig. 2 which shows the
J0 →0 20 r (1 + r )
lapse function f (r ) for different values of  in comparison
4G 0 (M0 r + 2M0 r 2 ) to the classical BTZ solution.
+ Y (r ) . (31)
r 2 (1 + r ) One observes that the lapse function f (r ) presents two
real valued horizons after the inclusion of non-zero angular
The second limit is the rotating classical solution (referring momentum, just like the classical case. However, the loca-
to constant couplings as in (5)), which is obtained when the tion of those two horizons changes due to the inclusion of
running paramter  is taken to be zero, scale dependence. Thus, for non vanishing J0 , there are two
horizons independent of the presence (
= 0) or absence
lim G(r ) = G 0 , (32)
→0 ( = 0) of scale dependence. One remembers that for van-
4G 0 J0 ishing angular momentum, there is only a single horizon for
lim N (r ) = N0 (r ) ≡ − , (33) the BTZ black hole which also gets shifted to lower values
→0 r2
r2 16G 20 J02 if one allows for scale dependence  > 0 [19]. In the scale
lim f (r ) = f 0 (r ) ≡ −8M0 G 0 + + , (34) dependent case there does not exist any finite  value for
→0 0
2 r2
which the black hole becomes extremal. This will be dis-
lim Λ(r ) = Λ0 . (35) cussed in more detail in Sect. 6. However, if one considers
→0

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022 Page 5 of 10 1022
 
the limit  → ∞, the lapse function approaches that of an r H ≈ r0 1 − r0 + O( 2 ) , (41)
extremal black hole.
It is important to note that, some relevant quantities, such where one indeed observes the expected deviation of the hori-
as the black hole radius r H , depend on the scale dependence zon with respect the classical case. One notes that in the
parameter . However, the asymptotic space-time for r → ∞ scale–dependent scenario the event horizon decreases when
does not show this dependence. This important fact will be  > 0 or increases when  < 0. This feature reveals that the
discussed in more detail in Sect. 5. black hole thermodynamics is directly affected.
For the inner horizon and for large values of M0 , the lapse
4.2 Horizon structure function takes an simplified form, which allows to express
the horizon as
The appearance of horizons is the defining criterium justify-    
ing that solution can be called black hole solution. The event 2G 0 2G 0
rH =
0
J0 1 − 2 J0  + O( ) ,
2
(42)
horizons are defined by f (r H ) = 0, which can be written as M0 M0
the solutions of the equation
where one recovers the classical horizon in the limit  → 0.
1 M0  
Y (r H ) = 1 ± Δ 2
rH (40)
4 G 0 J02
5 Invariants and asymptotic space-times

where Δ remains the same definition given in Eq. (8) Unfor- This section discusses different asymptotic limits. In partic-
tunately, this condition has no closed analytical solution for ular, we will focus on the asymptotic line element and the
the scale–dependent lapse function (25). Therefore, one has behavior of the the Ricci scalar R.
to restrict to a numerical analysis of the black hole horizons
and of the related subjects. Figure 3 shows the dependence 5.1 Asymptotic line element
of the horizons r H on the classical mass parameter M0 .
One observes that for vanishing angular momentum J0 = 5.1.1 Behaviuor when r → 0
0 there is only one real valued horizon with and without
scale dependence . For finite angular momentum J0
= 0 When we are close to the horizon, the lapse and shift functions
there appears a second inner horizon. In all studied cases, the suffer deviations respect the classical solution. In order to
effect of the scale dependence  > 0 was to reduce the outer emphasize that, we expand our result around r up to first
horizon radius with respect to the non-scale dependent case order to get
 = 0. Even though the analytical solution for the horizon
is not obtained, one still can analyze the lapse function in a ds02+ = − f 0+ dt 2 + f 0−1
+ dr + r [N0+ dt + dφ] ,
2 2 2
(43)
regime when the  correction is small. The event horizon, up
to leading order, is with
 
f 0+ (r ) = − 8M0 G 0 1 − 2r
 
16G 20 J02 (44)
+ 1 − 4r + O(r 2 ),
r2
 
N0+ (r ) = N0 (r ) 1 − 2r + O(r 2 ) , (45)

where we only are considering terms up to linear order in .

Given these expressions, it is very obvious that the lapse and
shift functions decreases if  > 0, respect the usual solution.

5.1.2 Behaviuor when r → ∞

The asymptotic line element is expressed in terms of asymp-

Fig. 3 Black hole horizons r H as a function of the mass M0 for  = 0 totic lapse and shift function (at large radii respect to the
and J0 = 0 (dotted dashed black line),  = 0 and J0 = 8 (blue dashed inverse of scale dependent parameter), i.e.
line),  = 0.1 and J0 = 0 (solid thin red line) and  = 0.1 and J0 = 8
(solid thick orange line). In addition 0 = 5 and the values of the rest −1 2
of the parameters have been taken as unity
2
ds∞ = − f ∞ dt 2 + f ∞ dr + r 2 [N∞ dt + dφ]2 . (46)

123
1022 Page 6 of 10 Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022

where the aforementioned functions are shown below 5.2.1 Behaviuor when r → 0

  For small r the invariant expansion of Eq. (50) gives

r2 2 1 1
f ∞ (r ) = 2 − 8M0 G 0 +O 2 , (47)
0 3 r  r


64G 20 J02
2 1 1 R=−  (1 + O(r )). (52)
N∞ (r ) = N0 (r ) +O 4 . (48) r3
3 r r
One observes that the presence of scale–dependent couplings
It is important to note that the asymptotic lapse function
= 0) produces a singularity at r = 0. This finding is
mimics at leading order an Ad S3 behavior. Going further,
we observe that the lapse function given in Eq. (47), at sub–
leading order, reflects the effect of the scale–dependent sce-
(
somewhat surprising since one might have hoped that quan-
tum induced scale dependence would help with singularity
problems of the classical theory and not make them worse.
nario through a factor 1/(r ). For the shift function, the scale
dependent effect is dominant at leading order in r (which
is given in Eq. (48)), which means that asymptotically the
running of the gravitational coupling modifies the classical
behavior. In addition, the quantum correction in both func-
However, the implementation of scale dependence that was
used here is clear and determinating the solution under the
given assumptions. Thus, one has to conclude that the solu-
tion of the singularity problem shown in (52) has to come
from a framework that falls outside of our assumptions such
tions appear as a term ∼ 1/(r ). Regarding the lapse func-
tion, if one remains only the dominant term in the large radius
limit, the asymptotic structure does not change, therefore, it
is equivalent to Ad S3 , which is consistent with our previous
work [19].
When studying the sub-leading corrections one has to be
as a line element with different structure, or the addition of
non-local or higher order terms in the effective action.
5.2.2 Behaviuor when r → ∞
The other asymptotic regime of interest is the large radius
carefull with the two competing limits  → 0 and r → ∞, expansion r → ∞. In this regime one can approximate the
which can not be commuted. In this context we note that the logarithm contribution according to ln(1 + z) ≈ z − z 2 /2
naming of the integration constants (J0 , M0 , . . . ) and thus of (using z = 1/r ). In this limit the Ricci scalar is given by
their physical interpretation was based on the classical limit


 → 0. 32M0 G 0 1
R = R0 − +O 4 . (53)
r 3 r
5.2 Asymptotic Invariants
Please note that the Ricci is asymptotically finite independent
For the study of coordinate independent properties of a solu- of the order one takes the competing limits r → ∞ and
tion it is useful to refer to invariants. For the given metric  → 0. However, due to the expansion of the logarithms, the
(22) the Ricci scalar is given below expression (53) is only valid if r
1/. As we know, the
Ricci scalar is constant in the classical case (51) and therefore
for certain values of the parameter , asymptotically the Ricci
1  3  2 
R= r N (r ) − 4 f  (r ) − f  (r ), (49) scalar is well-behaved take the classical value (51).
2r

which, after explicit insertion, reads as follows

6 Thermodynamic properties

Y  (r ) 2G 0 J02 Y (r ) The (numerical) knowledge of the horizons allows to study
R = R0 + 16G 0 M0 1+
r M0 r2 the thermodynamic properties of the scale dependent rotating
   black hole solution (25).
3G 0 J02 Y  (r )  4G 0 J02 Y (r )
− + 8M0 G 0 Y (r ) 1 −
2M0 r M0 r2
6.1 Hawking temperature
(50)
The Hawking temperature of a black hole assuming a circu-
From Eq. (50) we get the classical solution after demand that larly symmetric line element (22), is defined by
 → 0, which reads  
 1 ∂ f  
1   
TH (r H ) =  , (54)
R0 ≡ 6Λ0 , (51) 2π  2 ∂r r =r H 

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022 Page 7 of 10 1022

Fig. 4 The Hawking temperature TH as function of the classical mass

Fig. 5 The Bekenstein-Hawking entropy S as function of classical
M0 for four different cases:  = 0 and J0 = 0 (dotted dashed black
mass M0 for four different cases:  = 0 and J0 = 0 (dotted dashed
line),  = 0 and J0 = 8 (blue dashed line),  = 0.1 and J0 = 0 (solid
black line),  = 0 and J0 = 8 (blue dashed line),  = 0.1 and J0 = 0
thin red line) and  = 0.1 and J0 = 8 (solid thick orange line). In
(solid thin red line) and  = 0.1 and J0 = 8 (solid thick orange line). In
addition 0 = 5 and the values of the rest of the parameters have been
addition 0 = 5 and the values of the rest of the parameters have been
taken as unity
taken as unity

which gives for the solution of (25) 6.2 Bekenstein-Hawking entropy

The Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is also valid for theories

 
1  16M0 G 0  in which the gravitational coupling is variable [49–52]. For
TH (r H ) =  Δ. (55)
4π r H (1 + r H ) black hole solutions in D + 1 dimensions with varying New-
ton’s coupling the entropy is given by

 √
Please, note that this formula coincides with the classical h
expression, if one replaces G 0 by G(r H ) in Eq. (13). As it S= d D−1
r , (57)
4G(r )
can be seen from (55), the Hawking temperature vanishes
for Δ = 0. The extremal black hole is given when M0 0 , where h i j is the induced metric at the horizon r = r H .
which is the same extremality condition as in the classical For the present circularly symmetric solution the aforemen-
case (11). Figure 4 shows the temperature which takes into tioned integral is straightforward. The induced line element
account the running coupling effect in comparison to the for constant t and r slices is simply ds = r dθ and moreover
“classical” temperature, as a function of the parameter M0 . G H = G(r H ) is constant along the horizon. Therefore, the
We notes that indeed the curves with (
= 0) and without entropy for the solution (25) is
scale dependence ( = 0) coincide at the same minimal mass
M0 = J0 /0 . A H (r H )
Since scale dependence is motivated by quantum correc- S= = S0 (r H )(1 + r H ). (58)
4G(r H )
tions and since those corrections are typically small, it can be
expected that the integration constant , which parametrizes Figure 5 shows the entropy for our BTZ rotating scale–
the scale dependence, is small. Under this assumption one dependent black hole as a function of M0 . We observe that
can expand for r   1 to get the well-known Hawking tem- when J0 = 0 both, the classical entropy ( = 0) and the
perature (at leading order) i.e. scale–dependent entropy (
= 0) tend to zero for M0 →
0, whereas for J0
= 0 both, the classical and the scale–
  dependent solution, present a cut-off for the critical mass
TH (r H
0
) = T0 (r0+ )1 + 4r0+  + O( 2 ) (56) M0 = J0 /0 . An analytic expression can be can be obtained
in certain limit. By considering small values of  it is possible
to expand this expression
where r0+ is the classical horizon r H which is a solution of
(5) evaluated when r is close to zero. We wish to remark  
that this approximation is used because we always assume a
0
S(r H ) = S0 (r H
0
) 1 + r H
0
+ O( 3 ) . (59)
weak coupling . Besides, the classical Hawking temperature
T0 (r0+ ) is computed following the usual procedure for the Thus, the quantum effect increases the entropy respect the
lapse function (5) when r is small. classical solution.

123
1022 Page 8 of 10 Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022

7 Discussion tion are very similar. One notes that the Bekenstein-Hawking
entropy is increased by the scale dependence 
= 0 and that
Effective quantum corrections can be systematically intro- for large values of M0 the solutions with and without angu-
duced to the BTZ black hole by assuming a scale–dependent lar momentum match for a given value of , but they differ
framework. This implies non-trivial deviations from classi- for different values of . Throughout the numeric analysis
cal black hole solutions. In this work, one of the integration we also have used a relatively “small” value of , a choice
constants () of the generalized field equations is used as a which can be motivated by the assumption of relatively weak
control parameter, which allows to regulate the strength of quantum effects provoking scale dependence at the level of
scale dependence, such that for  → 0, the well-know classi- the effective action (15). Lets mention in this context that the
cal BTZ background is recovered. This article discusses the integration constant  can be made dimensionless for exam-
BTZ black hole taking into account angular momentum in ple by defining  = ¯ M0 , in which case the graphical and
the context of scale dependent couplings. A solution of the analytical results with respect to ¯ would have to be rescaled
corresponding field equations is presented and compared it correspondingly.
with three different known cases: the classical case ( = 0) Finally, lets comment on the ansatz (22). This type of
without angular momentum, the classical case ( = 0) with ansatz also works for the spherically symmetric case. How-
angular momentum, and the scale dependent case (
= 0) ever, inspired by the ideas presented by Jacobson [53] it was
without angular momentum. possible to show that, for spherically symmetric static black
The new scale–dependent solution has some interesting holes, this type of ansatz is actually a consequence of a simple
features, for instance the lapse function increases rapidly Null Energy Condition (NEC) [19–21].
when r → ∞ (which is present in the classical case) but This condition allows the avoidance of pathologies such
now the effect is deeper, see Fig. 2 and compare the black as tachyons, instabilities, and ghosts [54–56]. Further, the
curve ( = 0) with red curve ( = 1). By comparing Eq.
(5) with Eq. (47) and with Eq. 44, we observe the deviation
given by the scale–dependent framework respect to the clas-
sical solution. It is remarkable that when we are close to the
origin the lapse function suffers a shift, while when we are
NEC plays a crucial role in the Penrose singularity theorem
[57]. However, a straight forward implementation of a gen-
eralized NEC to the rotating BH was not achieved, since the
appearance of angular momentum reduces the symmetry of
the problem. One would first have to generalize the argu-
far from the origin it shows a decrease by a factor of 1/r . ments given in [53] to the rotational symmetry, before one
In both cases the solution is affected. can try to build an argument deriving the ansatz (22), as a
Furthermore, according to Fig, 3, the outer horizons consequence of some kind of NEC. Thus, at this point the
decrease when  increases. The effect of the scale depen- use of the ansatz (22) is well justified, since it agrees with the
dent approach is thus that it produces smaller horizons, when NEC for vanishing rotation and since it further implements
compared to the usual case. Interestingly this decrease does the structure of the line element for the case of the classical
not come with a change of the critical mass, where the two (not scale-dependent) counterpart.
outer horizons merge.
An analysis of the Ricci scalar reveals that a singular-
ity appears at r → 0 which is absent in the corresponding
classical BTZ solution. Indeed, the BTZ black hole has a 8 Conclusion
constant scalar, according to Eq. (51), whereas in the scale
dependent case (
= 0) the singularity at r = 0 is always In this work we have studied the scale dependence of the
present according with Eq. (52). This is a consequence of the rotating BTZ black hole assuming a finite cosmological term
scale–dependent scenario. in the action. After presenting the models and the classical
Regarding the Hawking temperature, it is interesting that black hole solutions, we have allowed for a scale dependence
the scale dependent formula and the corresponding clas- of the cosmological “constant” as well as the gravitational
sical counterpart, coincide, under the replacement G 0 → coupling, and we have solved the corresponding general-
G(r H ) = G 0 /(1 + r H ) (23). It is further remarkable ized field equations with static circular symmetry. We have
that the extreme black hole condition is also maintained compared the classical solutions distinguishing two differ-
and, therefore, the Hawking temperature is equal to zero ent cases, i.e. with and without angular momentum, with the
when M0min = J0 /0 , independent of the strength of scale corresponding scale dependent solution for same values of
dependence . Moreover, we note that in presence of scale– angular momentum. In addition, the horizon structure, the
dependent couplings the temperature is lowered with respect asymptotic spacetime and the thermodynamics were ana-
to the classic BTZ solution for large values of M0 . Whereas lyzed. In particular, the analysis of the Hawking temperature
when M0 is close to zero (for J0 = 0) and when M0 is close to allowed to find a extremal black hole which coincides with
M0min (for J0
= 0), the classical and the scale dependent solu- the classical counterpart.

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022
Acknowledgements We wish to thank Prof. Maximo Bañados for
some illuminating comments. The author A.R. was supported by the
CONICYT-PCHA/ Doctorado Nacional/2015-21151658. The author
B.K. was supported by the Fondecyt 1161150 and Fondecyt 1181694.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecomm
ons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit
to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Funded by SCOAP3 .
References
1. G. Esposito, Section 6.7.17 of the EOLSS Encyclopedia by
UNESCO arXiv:1108.3269 [hep-th]
2. S. Chandrasekhar, OXFORD, UK: CLARENDON (1985) 646 P
3. S.W. Hawking, Nature 248, 30 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1038/
248030a0
4. S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 43, 199 (1975) Erratum:
[Commun. Math. Phys. 46, 206 (1976)]. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02345020, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01608497
5. X. Calmet, Fundam. Theor. Phys. 178 (2015). https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-319-10852-0
6. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 311, 46 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/
0550-3213(88)90143-5
7. E. Witten, arXiv:0706.3359 [hep-th]
8. J.M. Maldacena, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 1113 (1999)
9. J. M. Maldacena,[Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 231 (1998)] https://
doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961, https://doi.org/10.4310/
ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1 [arXiv:hep-th/9711200]
10. A. Strominger, JHEP 9802, 009 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1088/
1126-6708/1998/02/009. arXiv:hep-th/9712251]
11. V. Balasubramanian, P. Kraus, Commun. Math. Phys.
208, 413 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002200050764.
arXiv:hep-th/9902121
12. O. Aharony, S.S. Gubser, J.M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri, Y.
Oz, Phys. Rept. 323, 183 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0370-1573(99)00083-6. arXiv:hep-th/9905111]
13. M. Banados, C. Teitelboim, J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. Lett.
69, 1849 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.69.1849.
[arXiv:hep-th/9204099]
14. M. Banados, M. Henneaux, C. Teitelboim , J. Zanelli, Phys.
Rev. D 48, 1506 (1993) Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 88, 069902
(2013)] https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.48.1506, https://doi.
org/10.1103/PhysRevD.88.069902. arXiv:gr-qc/9302012
15. C. Contreras, B. Koch, P. Rioseco, Class. Quant. Grav.
30, 175009 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/30/17/
175009. arXiv:1303.3892 [astro-ph.CO]
16. B. Koch, P. Rioseco , C. Contreras, Phys. Rev. D 91, no.
2, 025009 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.025009.
arXiv:1409.4443 [hep-th]
17. B. Koch, P. Rioseco, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 035002 (2016). https://
doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/33/3/035002. arXiv:1501.00904 [gr-
qc]
18. C. Contreras, B. Koch, P. Rioseco, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 720(1),
012020 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/720/1/012020
19. B. Koch, I. A. Reyes , Á. Rincón, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, no. 22,
225010 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/33/22/225010.
arXiv:1606.04123 [hep-th]
20. Á. Rincón, B. Koch , I. Reyes, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 831, no. 1,
012007 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/831/1/012007.
arXiv:1701.04531 [hep-th]
Page 9 of 10 1022
21. Á. Rincón, E. Contreras, P. Bargueño, B. Koch, G. Pan-
otopoulos , A. Hernández-Arboleda, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, no.
7, 494 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5045-9.
arXiv:1704.04845 [hep-th]
22. Á. Rincón , B. Koch, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1043, no.
1, 012015 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1043/1/
012015. arXiv:1705.02729 [hep-th]
23. E. Contreras, Á. Rincón, B. Koch , P. Bargueño, Int. J. Mod.
Phys. D 27, no. 03, 1850032 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1142/
S0218271818500323. arXiv:1711.08400 [gr-qc]
24. A. Hernández-Arboleda, Á. Rincón, B. Koch, E. Contreras , P.
Bargueño, arXiv:1802.05288 [gr-qc]
25. E. Contreras, Á. Rincón, B. Koch , P. Bargueño, Eur.
Phys. J. C 78, no. 3, 246 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/
s10052-018-5709-0. arXiv:1803.03255 [gr-qc]
26. Á. Rincón , G. Panotopoulos, Phys. Rev. D 97, no. 2, 024027 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.024027. arXiv:1801.03248
[hep-th]
27. B. Koch, I. Ramirez, Class. Quant. Grav. 28, 055008 (2011). https://
doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/28/5/055008. arXiv:1010.2799 [gr-
qc]
28. E. Contreras , P. Bargueño, arXiv:1804.00988 [gr-qc]
29. Á. Rincón, E. Contreras, P. Bargueño, B. Koch, G. Panotopoulos,
Eur. Phys. J. C 78(8), 641 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/
s10052-018-6106-4. arXiv:1807.08047 [hep-th]
30. E. Contreras, Á. Rincón, J.M. Ramírez-Velasquez,
arXiv:1810.07356 [gr-qc]
31. M. Reuter, H. Weyer, Phys. Rev. D 69, 104022 (2004). https://doi.
org/10.1103/PhysRevD.69.104022. arXiv:hep-th/0311196]
32. S. Domazet, H. Stefancic, Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 235005
(2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/29/23/235005.
arXiv:1204.1483 [gr-qc]
33. A. Bonanno, M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D 60, 084011 (1999). https://
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.60.084011. arXiv:gr-qc/9811026]
34. A. Bonanno, M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D 62, 043008 (2000). https://
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.62.043008. arXiv:hep-th/0002196]
35. A. Bonanno, M. Reuter, Phys. Rev. D 73, 083005 (2006). https://
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.73.083005. arXiv:hep-th/0602159]
36. M. Reuter , E. Tuiran, https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812834300.
0473 arXiv:hep-th/0612037
37. K. Falls, D.F. Litim, Phys. Rev. D 89, 084002 (2014). https://doi.
org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.084002. arXiv:1212.1821 [gr-qc]
38. Y.F. Cai, D.A. Easson, JCAP 1009, 002 (2010). https://doi.org/10.
1088/1475-7516/2010/09/002. arXiv:1007.1317 [hep-th]
39. D. Becker, M. Reuter, JHEP 1207, 172 (2012). https://doi.org/10.
1007/JHEP07(2012)172. arXiv:1205.3583 [hep-th]
40. D. Becker , M. Reuter, https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814623995.
0405 arXiv:1212.4274 [hep-th]
41. B. Koch, F. Saueressig, Class. Quant. Grav. 31, 015006
(2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/31/1/015006.
arXiv:1306.1546 [hep-th]
42. B. Koch, C. Contreras, P. Rioseco, F. Saueressig, Springer
Proc. Phys. 170, 263 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-319-20046-0.31. arXiv:1311.1121 [hep-th]
43. B.F.L. Ward, Acta Phys. Polon. B 37, 1967 (2006).
arXiv:hep-ph/0605054]
44. T. Burschil, B. Koch, Zh Eksp, Teor. Fiz. 92, 219 (2010)
45. T. Burschil , B. Koch, [JETP Lett. 92, 193 (2010)] https://doi.org/
10.1134/S0021364010160010. arXiv:0912.4517 [hep-ph]
46. K. Falls, D.F. Litim, A. Raghuraman, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 27,
1250019 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X12500194.
arXiv:1002.0260 [hep-th]
47. B. Koch , F. Saueressig, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29, no.
8, 1430011 (2014)https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X14300117.
arXiv:1401.4452 [hep-th]
123
1022 Page 10 of 10
48. A. Bonanno, B. Koch , A. Platania, Class. Quant. Grav. 34,
no. 9, 095012 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aa6788.
arXiv:1610.05299 [gr-qc]
49. T. Jacobson, G. Kang, R.C. Myers, Phys. Rev. D 49,
6587 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.49.6587.
arXiv:gr-qc/9312023]
50. V. Iyer, R.M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D 52, 4430 (1995). https://doi.org/
10.1103/PhysRevD.52.4430. [arXiv:gr-qc/9503052]
51. M. Visser, Phys. Rev. D 48, 5697 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevD.48.5697. arXiv:hep-th/9307194]
52. J.D.E. Creighton, R.B. Mann, Phys. Rev. D 52, 4569 (1995). https://
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.52.4569. arXiv:gr-qc/9505007]
123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 78:1022
53. T. Jacobson, Class. Quant. Grav. 24, 5717 (2007). https://doi.org/
10.1088/0264-9381/24/22/N02. arXiv:0707.3222 [gr-qc]
54. R. M. Wald, https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226870373.001.
0001
55. V.A. Rubakov, Phys. Usp. 57, 128 (2014)
56. V. A. Rubakov, [Usp. Fiz. Nauk 184, no. 2, 137 (2014)]https://
doi.org/10.3367/UFNe.0184.201402b.0137[arXiv:1401.4024
[hep-th]]
57. R. Penrose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 57 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevLett.14.57